Park the three drafted equivalency pairings pending maintainer review (not wired into anything)

data/curated/drafts/equivalency-pairings-draft.json

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+{
+  "_draft": "DRAFT FOR MAINTAINER REVIEW 2026-07-23 — three new pairings for data/curated/us_equivalency.json. Every Canadian maximum verified against the corpus text of the current C-46/IRPA consolidations. NOT deployed: append to the 'pairings' array, bump 'reviewed', then py -m canlex.commentary && py -m canlex.embed && eval && push.",
+  "pairings": [
+    {
+      "id": "weapons-carry",
+      "us_terms": ["unlawful carrying of a weapon", "CCW violation", "carrying a concealed weapon", "unlawful possession of a firearm", "felon in possession", "UCW"],
+      "canadian_offence": "Criminal Code s. 90 (carrying a concealed weapon); s. 91 (unauthorized possession of a firearm); s. 92 (possession knowing possession is unauthorized); s. 88 (possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace)",
+      "penalty": "Hybrid throughout; indictable maximums verified: s. 90 five years; s. 91 five years; s. 92 ten years; s. 88 ten years",
+      "branch": "SPLITS ON THE EQUIVALENT: ss. 90/91 (5 years) -> CRIMINALITY, IRPA s. 36(2)(b); ss. 92/88 (10 years) -> SERIOUS CRIMINALITY, s. 36(1)(b)",
+      "status": "guidance-only",
+      "analysis": "The most common US weapons conviction — carrying without a permit — usually equates to s. 90 or s. 91 (five-year maximums): criminality, deemed rehabilitation available after 10 years. The branch escalates to serious criminality where the record shows KNOWLEDGE the possession was unauthorized in a s. 92 sense, or a dangerous purpose (s. 88). 'Felon in possession' convictions typically map to s. 91/92 — the s. 92 knowledge element is often satisfied on those facts. The Hill evidence branch matters more here than for most pairings: US statutes bundle conduct Canada splits across four provisions.",
+      "caveats": [
+        "Constitutional-carry states: lawful-there conduct can still equate to a Canadian offence, but with no US conviction only the act branch (s. 36(2)(c)) is in play.",
+        "A weapon lawful in the US but prohibited in Canada (e.g. brass knuckles) engages the classification regulations (SOR/98-462) — check the device, not just the conduct.",
+        "Using a firearm in the commission of an offence (s. 85) carries consecutive mandatory minimums — an aggravated US charge deserves its own equivalency analysis."
+      ],
+      "authorities": []
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "sexual-assault",
+      "us_terms": ["sexual assault", "criminal sexual conduct", "sexual battery", "rape", "statutory rape", "sexual abuse"],
+      "canadian_offence": "Criminal Code s. 271 (sexual assault); s. 151 (sexual interference, complainant under 16); ss. 272/273 (weapon/bodily harm/aggravated)",
+      "penalty": "s. 271 hybrid, indictable maximum 10 years (14 where the complainant is under 16); s. 151 hybrid, 14 years with a one-year mandatory minimum; verified from the corpus text",
+      "branch": "SERIOUS CRIMINALITY — IRPA s. 36(1)(b) in effectively every configuration (every plausible equivalent carries a 10-year-or-greater maximum)",
+      "status": "guidance-only",
+      "analysis": "Any US sexual-offence conviction equates to a 10-years-or-more Canadian offence: serious criminality, no deemed rehabilitation ever, individual rehabilitation application (5 years post-sentence) or TRP the only routes. 'Statutory rape' variants map to s. 151 (14-year maximum) — age thresholds differ by state, so verify the victim's age against Canada's under-16 line (and the close-in-age exceptions in s. 150.1) via the Hill evidence branch.",
+      "caveats": [
+        "US registration-only dispositions (e.g. a deferred adjudication that still requires registration) remain step-1 questions — registration does not itself make a disposition a conviction.",
+        "Canada's s. 150.1 close-in-age defences can defeat equivalency for peer-age statutory-rape convictions — this is the classic Li point that available Canadian defences form part of the comparison.",
+        "Misdemeanor 'sexual battery' in some states covers non-consensual touching that still equates to s. 271 — the 10-year branch does not depend on the US felony label."
+      ],
+      "authorities": [
+        {"cite": "Li v Canada (MCI), [1997] 1 FC 235 (CA)", "court": "Federal Court of Appeal", "holding": "Equivalency compares essential elements including available defences; no retrial of the foreign case."}
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "immigration-fraud",
+      "us_terms": ["visa fraud", "immigration fraud", "false statement on immigration application", "alien smuggling", "harboring an alien", "marriage fraud"],
+      "canadian_offence": "IRPA s. 127 (misrepresentation offence; penalty s. 128); IRPA ss. 122-123 (document offences); IRPA s. 117 (organizing entry — smuggling); Criminal Code s. 368 (use of forged document)",
+      "penalty": "s. 128: hybrid, indictable maximum 5 years; s. 123: up to 14 years for document use/trafficking; s. 117: up to life (with mandatory minimums where aggravated); verified from the corpus text",
+      "branch": "SPLITS: false statements/marriage fraud -> s. 127/128 (5 years) = CRIMINALITY, s. 36(2)(b); document fraud with use/trafficking -> s. 123 (14 years) = SERIOUS CRIMINALITY; alien smuggling -> s. 117 = SERIOUS CRIMINALITY",
+      "status": "guidance-only",
+      "analysis": "A US conviction for lying on an immigration form (18 USC 1546 false-statement branch) generally equates to IRPA s. 127: five-year maximum, criminality only — deemed rehabilitation available. The same US statute's document-use branch reaches s. 123's 14-year maximum: serious criminality. Alien smuggling (8 USC 1324) equates to IRPA s. 117 — serious criminality, and s. 37 organized-criminality may also be in play. NOTE: a misrepresentation to CANADIAN authorities separately grounds s. 40 inadmissibility without any conviction; this pairing addresses foreign convictions only.",
+      "caveats": [
+        "18 USC 1546 is a classic Hill problem: one US provision straddles two Canadian branches — the record of what was actually done decides between s. 127 (5 years) and s. 123 (14 years).",
+        "'Harboring' convictions vary widely; minor-assistance facts may equate to s. 117's lower tiers or fail equivalency entirely — evidence branch required.",
+        "Marriage fraud: the US conviction equates to s. 127 (criminality), but the underlying facts may independently engage s. 40 misrepresentation if made to IRCC/CBSA."
+      ],
+      "authorities": []
+    }
+  ]
+}